[House Report 108-220]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
108th Congress Report
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
1st Session 108-220
======================================================================
REQUEST FOR DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION RECORDS ON USE OF AGENCY
RESOURCES RELATING TO MEMBERS OF TEXAS LEGISLATURE
_______
July 21, 2003.--Referred to the House Calendar and ordered to be
printed
_______
Mr. Young of Alaska, from the Committee on Transportation and
Infrastructure, submitted the following
ADVERSE REPORT
together with
SEPARATE VIEWS
[To accompany H. Res. 288]
The Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, to whom
was referred the resolution (H. Res. 288) directing the
Secretary of Transportation to transmit to the House of
Representatives not later than 14 days after the date of the
adoption of this resolution all physical and electronic records
and documents in his possession related to any use of Federal
agency resources in any task or action involving or relating to
Members of the Texas Legislature in the period beginning May
11, 2003, and ending May 16, 2003, except information the
disclosure of which would harm the national security interests
of the United States, having considered the same, report
unfavorably thereon without amendment and recommend that the
resolution not be agreed to.
PURPOSE OF THE LEGISLATION
House Resolution 288 directs the Secretary of
Transportation to transmit to the House of Representatives not
later than 14 days after the date of the adoption of this
resolution all physical and electronic records and documents in
his possession related to any use of Federal agency resources
in any task or action involving or relating to Members of the
Texas Legislature in the period beginning May 11, 2003, and
ending May 16, 2003, except information the disclosure of which
would harm the national security interests of the United
States.
BACKGROUND AND NEED FOR THE LEGISLATION
H. Res. 288 is a resolution of inquiry, which pursuant to
clause 7 of rule XIII of the Rules of the House of
Representatives, directs the Committee to act on the resolution
within 14 legislative days, or a privileged motion to discharge
the Committee is in order. H. Res. 288 was introduced and
referred to the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure
on June 19, 2003, and was ordered reported unfavorably by the
Committee on July 15, 2003.
Under the rules and precedents of the House, a resolution
of inquiry is a means by which the House requests information
from the President of the United States or the head of one of
the executive departments.
The issues considered in addressing H. Res. 288 involve the
subject of redistricting, an issue that is inherently political
but also a foundation of the democratic process. An additional
issue is the process by which legislative bodies compel
members' attendance for the purpose of achieving a quorum.
The majority of states as well as the Rules of the U.S.
House of Representatives authorize a minority of the members to
compel the attendance of absent members for the purpose of
achieving a quorum. Consequently, seeking members for the
purpose of securing a quorum so that the legislative body can
address legislative business is an official government
function.
H. Res. 288 asks for the production of records and
documents in the possession of the Secretary of Transportation.
By July 15, 2003, prior to the commencement of the hearing on
H. Res. 288, the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure
had received all relevant documents requested by the
resolution.
Events in the State of Texas giving rise to the resolution
As of mid May 2003, the Texas legislature was in the midst
of a pitched debate on redistricting legislation after failing
to adopt a plan during their prior session in 2001. To deprive
the Texas House of a quorum, approximately 50 Democratic
members left the state for Oklahoma. Some departed on Sunday
afternoon May 11, 2003 and some on Monday May 12, 2003.
On May 12, 2003 the Texas House of Representatives took
action pursuant to its rules, instructing the Sergeant-at-Arms
and officers appointed by Sergeant-at-Arms to return absent
members, not previously excused from the House chamber. The
Sergeant-at-Arms in turn asked the Texas Department of Public
Safety (DPS) to secure, by any available means, including
extradition if an absent member was outside the state, members
and return them to the Texas House for the purpose of
reinstating a quorum.
The Attorney General of Texas wrote to DPS on May 12, 2003
to verify the appropriate role of the DPS in helping the Texas
House obtain a quorum for the purpose of conducting business.
In that letter, the Texas AG identified the Texas
constitutional provisions and the House rules relating to the
issue and indicated that DPS had the authority to secure such
attendance including the power to arrest members. He concluded
by the letter by stating:
This is a serious legal matter for the State of
Texas. I trust that all persons with information or
knowledge whatsoever of the whereabouts of any absent
member of the House will assist you and offer their
full cooperation in your efforts to execute the
directive of the House.
A May 12, 2003 press release issued by the Texas Department
of Public Safety asked ``the public for assistance in locating
53 Texas legislators who have disappeared.'' According to the
release, ``[u]nder the Texas Constitution, the majority of
members present in session in the House can vote to compel the
presence of enough members to make a quorum. Members of the
House did so this morning and directed the Sergeant-at-Arms of
the House and the DPS to locate the absent members and bring
them back to Austin.''
The search for members therefore was an enforcement action
in which the public and all local, state, and federal
government officials were being asked to provide assistance and
relevant information on the fugitive legislators.
By May 13, 2003 the Texas House of Representatives
Sergeant-at-Arms wrote to the DPS and informed them that the
efforts of the DPS were appreciated but that since the truant
legislators had been found in Okalahoma the DPS was no longer
needed to help find and apprehend them.
Practice of the U.S. House of Representatives to compel members for a
quorum
At the federal level, the United States House of
Representative's Rules of the 108th Congress, set forth an
explicit procedure to compel absent members to return. Rule XX
(5)(a) requires that, in the absence of a quorum, at least 15
members (which may include the speaker) can compel the
attendance of absent members. Rule XX (5)(b) allows those
members present to order the Sergeant-at-Arms to send officers
to arrest members whodo not have a sufficient excuse for their
absence, and allows the House to determine their discharge
condition(s).
Practices of the States to compel members presence for a quorum
The majority of states (41) have rules that allow a
minority of legislators to compel absent members to return in
order to form a quorum. Although most states do not articulate
a specific method through which to compel this return, they
allow the legislature a great deal of leeway to accomplish this
task. One state that has a statutory mechanism for compelling
attendance, Ohio, authorizes the same means found in House
rules: arrest and return of the absent members. New Hampshire's
Supreme Court has judicially created a rule that allows the
Speaker of the House to compel member attendance.
Events involving the Federal Government giving rise to the resolution
Three events occurred on May 12, 2003 that affect the
agencies under the jurisdiction of the Transportation and
Infrastructure Committee. One deals with a direct inquiry by
the Texas DPS to the Federal Aviation Administration to provide
assistance in locating a plane that was believed to have been
used to ferry some of the absent legislators out of Texas. The
second was an inquiry from a U.S. House Member's office to the
FAA to find out the same information. And finally, the Federal
Air and Marine Interdiction Coordination Center contacted the
FAA as a result of contacts AMICC received from the Texas DPS.
Again the purpose was to find information concerning the plane
believed to be ferrying legislators out of Texas. In all three
cases the information provided by FAA was public in nature and
available from both sources within the DOT as well as from
several commercial and Internet sources.
Department of Transportation evaluation of the events
There have been several Congressional and Administration
inquiries since May 15, 2003 to review the events. To evaluate
the conduct of individuals within the Department of
Transportation, Kirk Van Tine, the DOT General Counsel,
conducted an initial review. His office reviewed relevant
emails, interviewed the parties involved, and produced
transcripts of recorded conversations. On June 26, 2003 the
Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure requested all
relevant information that his office had collected. On July 1,
2003 Mr. Van Tine provided the information requested and
advised the Committee that DOT Inspector General Ken Mead was
undertaking an additional independent review. By the time of
the Committee's July 15, 2003 hearing, the review of the DOT IG
was complete and that the information had been provided to the
Committee.
In addition, Mr. Mead participated in the hearing to
summarize his findings. In his testimony and report Mr. Mead
indicated that FAA personnel provided information that was
publicly available through the Internet. Actions by the parties
involved were consistent with the search for the truant
legislators and the request of the Texas House of
Representatives and the Texas Attorney General.
The Committee members consistently praised the Department
of Transportation and the Inspector General for the forthcoming
nature of the information and the thoroughness of the IG's
report. No information in the documentation of the IG or the
records of the Department indicated that the requests to the
FAA personnel were for any purpose other than to seek
information to be used in finding the truant legislators as
requested by the Texas House of Representatives and the Texas
Attorney General.
During the hearing, the DOT IG testified that air traffic
safety was not compromised by the requests for information. The
FAA air traffic controllers were operating in their normal
course of duties. In addition, there were no findings that
federal resources were misused or that agency personnel
violated any departmental rules or regulations. In each case,
FAA personnel appeared to act expeditiously and properly in
providing the information requested during the May 12, 2003
contacts.
The Committee determined that the information requested by
the resolution had been received by the Congress prior to the
Committee hearing and markup. At the hearing the sponsor of the
resolution, Congressman Gene Green from Texas stated that he
believed the purpose of the resolution had been achieved and
recommended unanimous support of the Committee to report the
resolution unfavorably.
Because the House had possession of the records and
documents identified by the resolution prior to the Committee's
markup, the Committee deemed the resolution to be moot and,
accordingly, ordered it reported unfavorably by voice vote.
SUMMARY OF THE LEGISLATION
House Resolution 288 directs the Secretary of
Transportation to transmit to the House of Representatives not
later than 14 days after the date of the adoption of the
resolution all physical and electronic records and documents in
his possession related to any use of Federal agency resources
in any task or action involving or relating to Members of the
Texas Legislature in the period beginning May 11, 2003, and
ending May 16, 2003, except information the disclosure of which
would harm the national security interests of the United
States.
LEGISLATIVE HISTORY AND COMMITTEE CONSIDERATION
H. Res. 288 was introduced on June 19, 2003 and referred to
the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure. On July 15,
2003 the Committee held a hearing at which time the sponsor and
the Department of Transportation made presentations on the
legislation and the result of the Department's inquiry into the
matter. The hearing was followed immediately by a markup in
open session, at which the measure was reported unfavorably,
without amendment, by voice vote, a quorum being present.
ROLLCALL VOTES
The Committee held no recorded votes.
COMMITTEE OVERSIGHT FINDINGS
With respect to the requirements of clause 3(c)(1) of rule
XIII of the Rules of the House of Representatives, the
Committee's oversight findings and recommendations are
reflected in this report.
COST OF LEGISLATION
The Committee estimates the cost of the resolution is
minimal.
COMPLIANCE WITH HOUSE RULE XIII
Clause 3(c)(2) of House rule XIII is inapplicable because
H. Res. 288 does not provide new budgetary authority or
increased tax expenditures.
CONSTITUTIONAL AUTHORITY STATEMENT
Pursuant to clause (3)(d)(1) of rule XIII of the Rules of
the House of Representatives, committee reports on a bill or
joint resolution of a public character shall include a
statement citing the specific powers granted to the Congress in
the Constitution to enact the measure. The Committee on
Transportation and Infrastructure finds that Congress has the
authority to enact this measure pursuant to its powers granted
under article I, section 8 of the Constitution.
FEDERAL MANDATES STATEMENT
H. Res. 288 does not involve Federal mandates.
PREEMPTION CLARIFICATION
The Committee states that H. Res. 288 does not preempt any
state, local, or tribal law.
ADVISORY COMMITTEE STATEMENT
No advisory committees within the meaning of section 5(b)
of the Federal Advisory Committee Act are created by this
legislation.
APPLICABILITY TO THE LEGISLATIVE BRANCH
The Committee finds that the legislation does not relate to
the terms and conditions of employment or access to public
services or accommodations within the meaning of section
102(b)(3) of the Congressional Accountability Act. (Public Law
104-1).
CHANGES IN EXISTING LAW MADE BY THE BILL, AS REPORTED
H. Res. 288 makes no changes in existing law.
SEPARATE VIEWS
The Transportation and Infrastructure Committee has a
strong tradition of bipartisanship and it is not often that the
Minority feels compelled to file separate views to the
Committee's report on a bill or resolution. The fact that we do
so in this instance underscores the seriousness of the issue at
hand.
The Committee, at the request of the sponsor of H. Res.
288, Congressman Gene Green, reported the resolution
unfavorably, by voice vote. We joined in this vote, not because
we disapproved of the resolution, but rather because the
resolution has been successful and resulted in a comprehensive
investigation by the Department of Transportation's Inspector
General, which was reviewed by the Committee in a hearing. The
Inspector General's report and the Committee's hearing
uncovered extremely disturbing facts regarding the misuse of
federal resources for partisan, political purposes. We are
therefore duty-bound to provide views separate from the
Majority, in which we summarize these facts.
Specifically, the Inspector General found that, acting upon
requests from Congressman Tom DeLay and the Texas Department of
Public Safety (DPS), the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA)
used its expansive resources and mobilized a number of its
facilities across the country to track down the aircraft of
Texas State Rep. Pete Laney. Their efforts were part of a broad
use of federal resources to track down Texas state legislators
in an effort to help pass a controversial redistricting plan.
Once FAA did find the plane, it reported that information to
Cong. DeLay's staff and to the Texas DPS without ever asking
why the information was needed and without ever verifying the
identity of the DPS callers.
While we recognize that the information ultimately
requested of FAA--the location, past and present, of an
aircraft--is information available to the public over the
internet, it does not follow that any member of the public--
even a prominent Member of Congress--has a right to call a
``red alert'' and mobilize FAA to track a particular aircraft.
And let us make no mistake: a full-scale mobilization is
exactly what occurred on May 12. In their initial phone call to
FAA, Congressman DeLay's staff gave FAA the tail number of the
Laney aircraft and, without ever providing a reason for the
request, asked FAA to find the aircraft's location. Using their
substantial resources, FAA tracked the Laney twin-engine Piper
Cherokee plane and advised Mr. Delay's staff that the aircraft
was due to land in Ardmore, Oklahoma ``in about seven
minutes''. It was only through the DeLay phone call that he and
the Texas State Republicans learned that the Democratic
legislators were in Ardmore.
This request for assistance was only one of several
requests to FAA from Congressman DeLay, the Texas Department of
Public Safety, and the U.S. Department of Homeland Security,
acting on behalf of the Texas Department of Public Safety. This
series of phone calls, seeking information about the past and
present location of the Laney plane, required at least 13 FAA
officials at several different facilities, to check records and
contact still more FAA officials in an effort to locate the
plane. Finally, FAA instituted a full-fledged safety ``alert''
on the Laney plane for the entire region covered by FAA's
Dallas-Ft. Worth Control Center. Under this alert, a message
was sent to all air traffic control facilities in that region
asking if they had any information about theaircraft. The
message was sent to all FAA airport towers and FAA approach control
facilities in the area, about 29 facilities.
We strongly disapprove of this use of federal resources in
order to gain political advantage. Under no circumstances
should federal resources have been used to influence the
outcome of the proposed Texas state redistricting plan, a plan
clearly designed to ensure the election of a greater number of
Texas Republican to the United States Congress.
It is also significant that the efforts to use the resource
of the federal government in the Texas political dispute were
not limited to use of FAA. There were also efforts to mobilize
resources of the Department of Justice and Homeland Security.
Although these efforts do not fall within the jurisdiction of
the DOT Inspector General and therefore were not addressed in
the Inspector General's report at the Committee's hearing, it
is important to note that the misuse of federal resources
appears to have extended beyond FAA to other Federal agencies.
The seriousness of this issue cannot be overstated.
Individuals--no matter how prominent--cannot be allowed to
mobilize Federal resources to gain advantage in a partisan
dispute. To allow such misuse, is to betray the trust and good
faith of the American public.
At the hearing, some Majority Committee Members questioned
the necessity of holding a hearing to examine the Inspector
General's report, and even asserted that the hearing was a
waste of the Committee's time. We strongly disagree. Hearings
on investigative reports by Inspectors General or the General
Accounting Office are routinely held as part of normal
Committee business. These hearings educate Members and the
public on the important issues covered by the reports. They
also provide Members with an opportunity to probe the
investigators on their findings and to clarify any questions
that may stem from the written reports. Such was the case with
this Committee hearing. Indeed, Member questioning solicited
significant additional information including the implications
of new FAA regulations and the Inspector General's opinion that
he believes that was ``some waste'' involved with the requests
to FAA.
The seriousness of the issues involved were recognized
immediately by senior officials at DOT as soon as they were
informed of Congressman DeLay's involvement with FAA on
tracking the Laney aircraft.\1\ Immediately upon learning of
the issue, DOT's Chief of Staff promptly informed the Security
of Transportation, the Deputy Secretary, and the DOT General
Counsel of Cong. DeLay's request and FAA's response. These top
DOT officials decided to immediately begin an investigation
into the extent of FAA's involvement and whether FAA resources
had been misused.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ DOT's Chief Counsel was not notified of the DeLay phone calls
and the FAA response to those calls until nine days after the incident.
We believe, and the Inspector General concurs, that senior DOT
officials should have been notified immediately after the first request
for FAA assistance. The recently released FAA policy would provide for
such notice.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Inspector General also recognizes the seriousness of
the issue. In his report he states: ``When the Administrator
[of FAA] and the Secretary [of DOT] were finally informed of
[FAA Assistant Administrator for Congressional Relations]
Balloff's contact with Rep. DeLay's staffer, they recognize its
importance and, in our opinion, took timely and appropriate
action to have the circumstances investigated.'' DOT's quick
grasp of the severity of the problem resulted in an almost
immediate investigation by DOT General Counsel Kirk Van Tine.
That investigation was then superceded by the DOT Inspector
General's investigation.
FAA's subsequent response to this incident shows that FAA
has serious reservations about the way its resources were used.
On July 15, FAA issued a policy on how it would respond to
similar future requests. Under this policy had Congressman
DeLay's office asked FAA to track an aircraft, FAA would have
asked why the information was being requested. (In the calls
that were made on May 16, the purpose was never revealed.) Upon
learning that the purpose was to track down Texas state
legislators, the request to track the aircraft would have been
denied. That decision could only be overruled by the FAA
Administrator or the Secretary of DOT. This policy is itself a
recognition by FAA that its personnel and resources should not
be used to aid one side in a political battle.
The Inspector General's report reveals the extent of the
partisanship involved with the requests to FAA. One of the
callers to FAA suggested a full-fledged search and rescue
effort to find the Laney plane. FAA rejected this request
because there was no reason to believe that the plane was
missing because of an accident. Another request even went so
far as to inquire about possible criminal prosecution because
the plane had gone off FAA radar when it descended below 4,000
feet. FAA rightly told the caller that no FAA regulations had
been violated.
The FAA resources that were mobilized for the search for
the Laney plane are similar to those that would have been used
if a plane were believed to be missing because of an accident.
Indeed, the efforts to find the Laney plane exceeded those that
would have been required for a single accident because there
were actually two searches requested and conducted: the Laney
plane was located at Ardmore as a result of the first search;
when the Laney plane subsequently left Ardmore, a second search
was initiated.
The FAA's ability to locate missing aircraft is a vital
part of our safety system. Efforts to use FAA's resources for
political disputes threaten this vital safety resource.
Political requests necessarily divert FAA personnel from that
primary safety mission, and create cynicism and disillusion in
FAA's dedicated work force.
Nowhere is this better captured than in the comments of the
FAA's Assistant Administrator for Congressional Relations. When
he received the first call, the Assistant Administrator assumed
that he was being asked to help locate a plane with a safety
problem. The next day after reading about the incident in the
newspaper, he learned that the so-called problem was not
safety, but politics. His reaction is striking.
I just felt like I had been used * * * and I just did
not like * * * somebody calling me for political
reasons. * * * I would never use my office to help
somebody out politically, for any political reasons,
period.
The issues at stake here--misuse of federal resources for
partisan, political gain--cannot be abided. The American people
deserve better.
Robert Menendez.
Jim Oberstar.
Timothy Bishop.
Michael E. Capuano.
Nick Lampson.
Rick Larsen.
William O. Lipinski.
Corrine Brown.
Jerrold Nadler.
Peter DeFazio.
Michael H. Michaud.
Anthony Weiner.
Juanita Millender-McDonald.
Eddie Bernice Johnson.
Eleanor Norton.
Gene Taylor.
Bob Filner.
Jerry F. Costello.
Elijah E. Cummings.
Jim Matheson.
Earl Blumenauer.
Nick Rahall.
Bill Pascrell.
Mike Honda.
Tim Holden.
Brad Carson.
Leonard L. Boswell.
Lincoln Davis.
Shelley Berkley.
Julia Carson.
Ellen O. Tauscher.
Joseph M. Hoeffel.
Brian Baird.
SEPARATE VIEWS
There are broad underlying issues with regards to House
Resolution 288, reported unfavorably from the House
Transportation and Infrastructure Committee. The intent of the
resolution was two-fold, to ensure that the gross misuse of
Federal resources--in this case the utilization of FAA
resources for political purposes--is never repeated, and to
procure all relevant documents related to this specific
incident. The consensus reached in reporting the bill
unfavorably is a result of the Federal Aviation
Administration's (FAA) willingness to provide complete and
accurate information to the Committee of jurisdiction. We are
therefore satisfied that the resolution has been effective with
regards to obtaining all pertinent and relevant information
from the Federal Aviation Administration chronicling every
facet of their involvement in this incident. Unfortunately, the
candor and willingness to provide all relevant information has
not been demonstrated by the Department of Homeland Security or
the Department of Justice.
We still maintain that the actions of the Office of the
Majority Leader constitute a gross misuse of Federal resources
and undermine the core mission of the Federal Aviation
Administration--an agency charged with maintaining the safety
of our nation's airways. This assertion is buttressed by the
subsequent rule changes undertaken by FAA Administrator Blakey
and Secretary of Transportation Mineta. The sheer fact that
changes in rules governing the access to flight information by
Federal officials were undertaken is a clear indication that
Federal resources were indeed abused by Congressional officials
to affect a state political issue. In as much as this incident
has prompted a comprehensive review of FAA procedures, it is
fair to assume that the FAA and the Department of
Transportation Inspector General's office feel this incident
indicates that an opportunity for potential future abuses/
misallocations of Federal resources could still exist, and thus
the rule change has been implemented.
The events that lead to the Committee hearing and
subsequent markup have indeed received much warranted
attention. The period beginning May 11, 2003, and ending May
16, 2003, are the dates in question, and as the facts
demonstrate, this is the period of time when the Office of the
Majority Leader contacted the Federal Aviation Administration
to inappropriately employ their assistance in locating the
aircraft of Pete Laney. The Office of the Majority Leader
inquiry, and the subsequent search by FAA and possible other
Federal agencies, was prompted by political concerns stemming
from the legal, legislative actions of the Democrats in the
Texas House of Representatives. As was discussed in testimony
by Representative Green in the hearing on H. Res. 288, the
Texas Democrats, in an attempt to thwart a partisan
redistricting effort at the Texas state level, employed a time-
honored and legal tradition of ``quorum-busting.'' In order to
effectively deny a quorum, the Texas Democrats boarded buses
and planes, and relocated in Ardmore, Oklahoma, an area out of
the jurisdiction of the Texas Department of Public Safety.
In response to the legislative maneuvers undertaken by the
Texas Democrats, the Speaker of the Texas House of
Representatives, in concert with the Texas AttorneyGeneral and
the Governor of Texas, began a comprehensive search for the legislators
in an attempt to return them to the Capitol and restore a quorum. We
have been unable to identify and determine when and who contacted the
office of the Majority Leader from these aforementioned Texas offices,
given the destruction of all documents relating to this incident at a
Texas state level. However, the crux of the Transportation Committee's
hearing focuses upon the inappropriate use of the Federal Aviation
Administration resources by the Office of the Majority Leader. At
approximately 4:00 p.m. on May 12, 2003, a senior staffer from the
Office of the Majority Leader contacted the FAA Assistant Administrator
for Government Affairs and Industry, David Balloff, to inquire about
the location of N711RD, the plane owned by Pete Laney.
During the phone conversation between David Balloff and a
staffer from the Office of the Majority Leader, the location of
the plane was provided and the staffer was advised that the
plane would be landing seven minutes later in Ardmore, OK. Upon
receiving this information, the staffer from the Office of the
Majority Leader made subsequent requests for the locations of
the plane on May 11, the day before. Allegedly, throughout the
conversation, the FAA official never questioned the reasons why
the Office of the Majority Leader was requesting this
information and tying up Federal resources specifically
dedicated for other purposes. It is quite disturbing that
Federal officials, not working in a law-enforcement or public
safety capacity, could obtain this information without stating
a general purpose for requesting the information. Obviously,
considering the rule changes that have grown out of the
incident in question, the Department of Transportation, in
conjunction with the Federal Aviation Administration has
determined that the series of phone calls from the Office of
the Majority Leader to the FAA on May 12, 2003, were at best
questionable and a highly inappropriate abuse of Federal
resources for questionable purposes.
Although Mr. DeLay and some Members of this Committee argue
that his inquiries were insignificant, the telephone transcript
attached to the Inspector General's letter to Senator Lieberman
demonstrates how many FAA personnel and resources were
unwittingly recruited into Mr. DeLay's hunt for the Texas
legislators. As the attached chart details, two telephone calls
from Mr. DeLay's senior staff member a little after 4 p.m. EDT
on May 12th set off a round of inquiries that ended up
involving two offices in FAA's Washington headquarters and air
traffic control facilities in San Angelo, Texas, Fort Worth,
Texas, and McAlester, Oklahoma. In the eight hours following
Mr. DeLay's inquiries, at least thirteen different FAA
employees used their time, expertise, and equipment to track
down and locate an aircraft that, as Inspector General Mead
testified, was in no danger and was violating no FAA rules or
guidelines.
It is our unyielding view that at no time should Federal
resources be utilized to affect the outcome of any state
political issue. Rules governing the use of Federal resources
for these purposes should and must be held sacrosanct. If
Members of the House or the Senate are allowed to use Federal
resources to track political opponents, as appears to be the
situation in the incident in question, then we have strayed
from the duties that we were elected to perform. Our laws exist
expressly to prevent resources of the Federal government from
being used as a broadsword in a state political dispute. Those
who seek to characterize this resolution and the related
hearing and markup as political are entirely correct. The use
of Federal resources to further the interests of a political
party are intrinsically political, and represent conduct which
ill-behooves the legislative process and this institution.
While we are pleased that the Investigator General of the
Department of Transportation conducted a fair and balanced
investigation, releasing all relevant information to the
Committee of jurisdiction, the same cannot be said for the
investigations related to the Department of Homeland Security
and the Department of Justice. Full and impartial
investigations have not occurred. Therefore, though we have
recommended that the Resolution be reported unfavorably out of
the Transportation Committee--due to the thorough and complete
investigation performed by the Department of Transportation
Investigator General--we remain concerned that the Department
of Homeland Security and the Department of Justice still refuse
to provide complete information to requests made by
Representative Green and Senator Lieberman.
Eddie Bernice Johnson.
Mike Thompson.